>>11578
>Yeah I think cops being able to enter your property for what ever excuse they can come up with and without a warrant and there by pissing allover the 4th and 2nd Amendments is really fucking bad.
Yeah, no shit. But not only is the story with f496c6 not actually clear, the overall argument is that "cops bad" is retarded, not that whatever bad actions a cop may do is okay.
>>11578
>Why wouldn't it?
Why would it? Why would it be a stop-and-frisk in specific that makes you distrustful? Why nothing else in that incident? Why nothing else in any other cop story? What was it about a stop-and-frisk that made that specific anon go "cops bad"?
>>11580
You are fucking retarded. If it's unconstitutional, than it shouldn't be done, full stop. The fact that the people that it's being used on are a bunch of criminals is besides the point, and you're a fucking dipshit for passing the blame for this to the joggers, law enforcement easily could've decided to
not adopt it, no matter how effective it would've been. If you were more honest, the blame would be about 50/50.
>>11582
Again, that depends on the corruption in the city and/or state. If it isn't corrupt, then criminals likely won't be treated with kid gloves, regardless of race.